Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    August 31, 2013 1:00am-1:31am PDT

1:00 am
for 1 year extension. this includes my presentation i'm available for questions. thank you >> project sponsor. >> good afternoon president's fong and members of the commission, director ram i'm jim rubin this time representing the hotels and partnership of brand new partnership that the proposed developer of the hotel. we're asking you to provide this new ownership sufficient additional time to continue the project. it's been difficult for releasing up to last year. although a couple of office projects did get constructed probably not profitly virtually no hotels were abilities during
1:01 am
that time. it appears you the time has arrived and this hotel will be built. it consists of personality hotels and rock capital and other folks will speak each of the representatives are here. nonetheless this is a group with financial strength first year i think we're the lucky beneficiaries and now we have the need for hotels and especially the needs for hotels in all speekts e sectors. let's talk about time. we asked for 3 years. presumably because of the age of
1:02 am
the entitlement the staff is rome one year. there are a number of things that have to take place and in san francisco everything takes longer it might expect. we're going to work as rapidly as possible but we don't want our hands tied. we want to split that maybe two years with an additional year if we can demonstrate diligence in getting the hotel built. that's our presentation. dan is here and would like to address you, we have 89 minutes left which we don't need. >> thank you president fong and commissioners and director ram. dan with the group. i will be very brief but i'm
1:03 am
pleased to be here in front of i and to let you know we're thufly excited about this project. we finished the joint venture with some capable folks we've got a gravity team including seasoned local expertise and backing for this project. as jim mentioned those projects take time to put together those team. our collective team is really a new team so we're starting from today to put together this project including finalizing the time and the construction so there's a ramp up period to bring on the new team and our
1:04 am
new contractor to also got out and final listed our contradiction team and all the related planning and process that goes ♪ securing that financing before we, move forward. those are obviously a significant number of hurdles. we can this stuff doesn't come easy in san francisco. so we're asking respectfully we be given >> anything else from project sponsor. >> i wanted you to know there
1:05 am
are a number of letters of sport. >> thank you. >> and no opposition we're aware of. >> okay opening up to public comment two names. >> good evening i'm the xvd executive director i'm not only the executive director but i'm speaking for both organizations. hotels bring jobs full-time jobs all provided through the hotel industry. we're employing san francisco
1:06 am
residents. we have over $200 million last year and that provided the hotel tax fund and many other city services related to hotels we have had the pleasure of working with folks in the hotel industry. their gajdz in the community they work with us and parking lot with the colleagues. so again, we recommend and actually support the extension they're seeking for an organization they've profane with a great opportunity to support the jobs so we thank you for your time tonight >> any additional public comment on this item. okay public comment is closed >> i'm delighted to see a small
1:07 am
hotel come forward and remembering the presentation a few weeks. there's room for different sizes. the only thing i'm concerned about it this hotel was designed too long ago. some of us saw this in 2010 at which time i raised questions about the architecture design of this building. and we've spent.
1:08 am
this building obey in the conservatism district this project was not in operation and there's no architect mentioned on the design. there's no name on this anywhere. there's an attempt how to do it but the devil is in the details and i want a review3
1:09 am
1:10 am
>> so, just to be clear, what you're saying is two-year extension. and that two-year mark, if think didn't make that two-year mark, they'd have to come back to the planning commission? >> correct. >> correct. within that interim period, they'd update the design, work with staff on the design and come back as an informational item. >> are you asking specifically that it go to the commission or preservation staff? >> preservation staff. >> staff, yeah. >> i would, i would actually suggest that you make that a joint discussion. >> on the informational item? >> maybe if i may, one possibility would be to ask that the architectural review committee of the hpc redo it rather than a -- >> right, thank you, that's
1:11 am
perfect. so, i would move that. >> i'll second it. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'm fine with the motion. just the clarification that we would get an informational presentation with the architectural renderings once they're agreed upon between project sponsor and hpc architectural and planning staff, i think, in conjunction. >> i'm told i think that because the hpc is a separate charter body, you can't require them to do something. you can request that the project sponsor go to their committee. >> [speaker not understood]. [laughter] >> we're sitting here squibling
1:12 am
asking what we're being asked to do. [multiple voices] >> you work with the staff, you come back -- >> we urge you to -- [multiple voices] >> come back in four months. >> so, commissioners, i do have a motion and second on the floor. to condition that the project be extended for a two-year period only and ultimately at the end of that two-year period if there needs to be another extension that they have to come back to the planning commission to request that. and the design return as an informational item to the planning commission after it has been reviewed by preservation staff and with a request that the historic preservation commission architectural review committee provide design review comments. on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to 0. commissioners, it will place
1:13 am
you on item 16 a and b for case no. 2013.0276bx for 350 mission street request for an allocation of square footage and request for determination of compliance. >> good afternoon once again, guy with planning staff. [multiple voices] >> i'm sorry. we need to make an announcement. sorry. >> president fong and commissioners, i need to ask you support my recusal from hearing this project. the city attorney has advised me that my previous long-term tenure [speaker not understood] and my position as a former associate partner would create a potential conflict of interest as seen by the public. so i'd like to recuse myself. >> thank you. is there a motion? >> move to recuse commissioner moore. >> second. >> on that motion to recuse commissioner moore, commissioner antonini? excuse me, commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis?
1:14 am
>> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> no. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commission president fong? >> aye. >> that motion passes 5 to 1 with commissioner sugaya voting against. >> i personally don't think it's a conflict. so, that's why i voted that way. >> commissioners, again, i'm kevin guy with planning staff. the request before you is to amend a previously approved project at 350 mission street in order to add additional office space. in 2011 the commission approved a project to demolish an existing four-story building and construct a new 24-story 350-foot office building containing approximately 340 square feet of office uses, 1,000 square feet of ground floor retail space, or 23,500 square feet of subterranean parking. this project is currently under construction. so, today's request is to amend
1:15 am
the previous conditional use -- i'm sorry, office allocation and downtown project allocation approvals, to add up to six additional floors of office space. the project as amended would reach up to 30 stories with a height of 455 feet to the top of the mechanical parapet. the amended project would contain over 420,000 square feet of office uses and 450 square feet of office space. the floor area that would need to be developed would be based on the anticipated needs which is aside from the additional height and square footage, the basic form and design of the building would not change. however, these revisions require that the commission reconsider the previously granted planning code exceptions for separation of towers, ground level wind currents and bulk level limitations and grant new exception for the number of freight loading spaces. i would be happy to discuss the specifics of any of these exceptions in further detail. i should note that following publication of your packet
1:16 am
staff received some correspondence c.b. richard ellising concern with the addition. these contend that the scale would overwhelm mission street and would attribute to a canyon effect that would diminish light and views of the sky in the area. several communications also offer the program should be disqualified from the fee deferral program that is administered by the department of building inspection. i should note that i have consulted with pamela levin at dbi on this particular issue. she has indicated that because of the previously entitled project, was entitled and received permits prior to the expiration of that fee deferral program, there is nothing about a change in scope to the project that is being requested today that would disqualify it from deferral of fees. so, in other words, the project has and will continue to qualify for the fee deferral program. even though the program ended in july. so, in conclusion, staff does support the request for the additional square footage. the project fulfills the goals and objectives of the transit
1:17 am
sin term plan to concentrate office development near the future transit center with an intense walkable urban context. the height is compatible with the various scale in the area and the situated substantially lower than the height limit permitted by the underlying 700 foot height limitation as well as the thousand foot zoning of the transbay tower nearby. i'm available for any questions that you may have. thank you very much. >> thank you. project sponsor, please. >> marathon was not by design, coincidence. good afternoon, commissioner fong, director ram, members of the commission. i'm jim rubin, rubin junius and rose representing kill roy again. you remember we were 333 brannan as well. just happens these were on the same calendar. we are going to show you an abbreviated architectural presentation of the project itself.
1:18 am
however, late 2011, five of the seven of you saw that project before so what i'm going to do is spend a little bit of time talking about the unusual situation that we're in. it's not untoward at all, it's just unusual because we're here asking to add height to a building that's already under construction. what actually happened is that the property was zoned by a german pension fund named gol and they started building this project meaning they started the entitlement prosis for this project under the old zoning and then the tcdp started to get studied and gol elected to continue under the old zoning, try to get their project entitled, and probably built as a competitive advantage for one thing, ahead of the enactment of the tdcp. it was a reasonable decision to make at the time. there was a full e-i-r done for that project. it was entitled by you in 2011 at 24 stories.
1:19 am
those that were here will remember when they see the lobby area and the interactive wall, that it was enthusiastically supported at the commission at that time. subsequent to that, two critical things happened. the tcdp got enacted and rezoned that footage or lot for 700 feet. i will add the septment process. the department pushed hard for us to go to the additional height and wanted to see a taller building. david wall whos what the representative of gol wanted to continue on with the existing zoning. so, the tcdp passed which would now allow 700 feet at that location and gol sold the property to kill roy. kill roy has started construction. they broke ground four or five months ago. some of you may have been at the groundbreaking. they also negotiated a full building deal with sales force. sales force has indicated in the interest of adding some
1:20 am
volume to the building, the building itself can take maybe 3 to 6 floors which is why we're stuck with that. if we were starting over we'd probably try to build to 600 feet, but we can't. we have a building that's under construction. so, that's the situation we are in. the good news is we can do this. there is rezoning out there that a lows for much higher height and you could approve us for up to six additional floors. and as i said, it's driven by sales force if we don't get the addition, we won't build it and sales force won't have it. but we think it is the right location for increased volume. it's the right location for sales force there across the street as well. they're up about a million feet there and they will be directly across the street from the transit center. so, i'm going to turn it over to steve sobel from skid more to show you, remind you i guess is probably a better way of the
1:21 am
building itself. actually, before i do, i wanted to -- this is a -- i don't know if you can see. we had some graphics, too, that will show up on your screen. the millennium, this is the millennium building. our building is going upright here. right now it will come to about there. if we get the additional floors it will go to from. ~ there. i don't think we're changing the environment particularly for the millennium people. they're completely surrounded but buildings that are actually taller, so. i don't know if i left you enough time, but --
1:22 am
>> good evening, commissioners, i'm steve sobel with [speaker not understood] and i'm the project director for the 350 mission project. thank you. president fong, commissioners, i will just walk you through the project. okay. [speaker not understood] discussed the project sits on the northeast corner of fremont and mission street. it is centrally located in the transit center. today the market street transit corridor and in the future the transbay transportation corridor.
1:23 am
the access by pedestrian is both by the street and also by the presidio that runs on the east side of this project. this is the rendering that jim showed you with the building as it is designed today at 24 stories. and this shows the increase of the up to six floors. again, just a bird's eye view of the same. today we're at about 375 feet and the adjacent structures are all taller. 350 beale is slightly lower. and here we have the up to 6-floor version at 455 feet. again, nominally slight change in the height of the building. this is the existing elevation of the building.
1:24 am
this is the extended elevation. a rendering back to the building down fremont. and a view of the building down mission. in each case it shows the existing condition on the left and the proposed extrusion on the right. the building is unique in the sense that it sits directly across from the transbay center and we've looked at creating a really unique and public space at the lobby level, a 52-foot lobby, which is focused on pedestrian use. this is a shot inside that shows the ability to move freely through the lobby and also some amphitheater type seating to support the retail. thank you. >> okay, thank you. okay, opening it up to public comment. i have a few speaker cards.
1:25 am
rita alber. gita vash. paula [speaker not understood]. and daria venisee. good afternoon, commissioners. paula pratt low and gita had to leave. we are not familiar with your unique process, so, it's been quite an education, our first time here. and, so, i'm here. my name is rita [speaker not understood]. i'm a resident at 301 mission street, and thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today and to communicate via e-mail. we obviously respectfully disagree with the developers and with this plan. please understand that although the e-mails you received from owners and from residents of 301 mission street in our appearance today is triggered by concern about a particular building, 350 mission street, our overarching concern is on the well designed and inviting
1:26 am
new transit center neighborhood for everyone. i personally am involved with the community benefit district. we care greatly about this transit center area. we look forward to the rooftop park and all other buildings that are being developed in the area. however, as approved, the current height provides a significant addition to the downtown office space with certain controlled impacts and in line with the building adjacent to it on mission and beale street. as proposed, we feel strongly that it will exacerbate adverse impacts further limiting visible sky and light the majority of the day, create shadow and tunnel effect as well as a wind corridor along the sidewalks in the area, including additional congestion and debris. [speaker not understood]. although a lovely design, there is no setback or open public space interior. exterior r bull beingv space.
1:27 am
it closes off the entire block on the north side of mission street. all the buildings abut the sidewalk. the current approved plan for 24 stories balances the need for downtown office space with maintaining the quality of life, reducing excessive building -- bundling of high-rise buildings of similar size, and keeping the important transit center as a well designed attractive and inviting urban environment. this is in context of many other large projects in that area that have been approved for this area. and many of them -- the owners in the area have relied on the current plan in making -- in choosing their homes and where they live in this neighborhood. the proposal to amend we feel will reduce the enjoyment for workers, visitors, and residents and ultimately affect businesses in the area. many of the other projects, as
1:28 am
i understand, in this area have been designed and approved with setbacks and open exterior public spaces. mission street is going to be a tunnel corridor with the additional height. at this point, as we understand it, it will be above the height of the building next to it on beale and fremont and almost at the height of the building behind it completely blocking it. and the skylight coming from that direction, from the north. >> ma'am, your time is up. good, i'm done. thank you. >> thank you. thank you very much. [speaker not understood] your stamina, by the way. good evening. commissioners, president, director. thank you for your time and your kind attention and most importantly for your consideration.
1:29 am
my name is darya jenice. i live at 301 mission street. i think the project sponsor referred to me as one of the millennium people. i'm not sure what that means, but i'm -- that's the best -- my home, my neighborhood. and i think this is an outrageously glamorous building. have you seen the computer generated animation bubble wall, grand staircase video that kill roy has on their website? it is gorgeous. anyone would want to be a neighbor of that building. i do find it peculiar, though, that all of the renderings on that site, including the animation, depict mission as though it has already been approved for the increase and
1:30 am
over a hundred feet for a grand total of 455. i think i saw a picture that stated that the top of the buildings was 375 feet, and i'm not sure all the documentation i have from you states 350 feet on the approved project. forgive me if i'm distorting that in some way. and i understand that the planning department's plan for our neighborhood contemplates mixed residential, commercial, and office use which is terrific, anchored by that wonderful transbay terminal when it is finished. i look forward to that day. the additional floors requested in this proposal will significantly increase the shadows over mission street. let's just go ahead and put that on the table, shall we, because it's going to throw a shadow. it's in


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on